The KDE Community is happy to announce the immediate availability of the
second release candidate for KDE 4.0. This release candidate marks the last
mile on the road to KDE 4.0. This release sees increasing participation from distributions, you can download packages for Debian, Kubuntu, Mandriva, openSUSE & Fedora or grab the live CDs from Kubuntu & openSUSE.

While progress on the quality and completeness of what is to become the KDE 4.0 desktop
has been great, the KDE Community decided to have another release candidate before releasing
KDE 4.0 on January 11th. The codebase is now feature-complete. Some work is still being done
to put the icing on the KDE 4.0 cake. This includes fixing bugs,
finishing off artwork and smoothing out the user experience.

Sorry mate. I haven't had a chance to look at KDE4 much, although I did try a livecd of it some time back, and I don't remember the 'kicker' looking like it did in the screenshot. I appreciate your work, don't get me wrong.

I symphathize with you're, eh, disapointment, on the continuing critizism on the panel. I know it will change, you know it will change, but it seems lot's of people still don't. I think the reason behind this is that info on development, info on roadmap, info on planning, info on desing decesion, etc are very scattered. Some is on the dot, some is in blogs (a lot in yours :-) some in the mailing lists, some on IRC, etc. Easy to miss stuff. I like to follow all this, so i'm pretty infromed, but not all of us are. Maybe it would be a good idea to channel al this stuff thru one medium and one medium only. All other stuff can than be dismissed as work in progress/developers own current default.

Icons work fine now, i checked yesterday, the support is back after few month of left border edge only. The name is their (on 1 line) if you resize the icon. The small button in icon to open with different application is gone/broken again, but i hope it will be back in time, it was great, i also hope it will be in dolphin soon. The main problem is the icon title, it is insode of the border, so we have to resize the icon to see it, and it is only on 1 line...

Icon are actually plasmoid only, they are not files in the desktop folder yet, but for application, it is not a problem anyway so it is fine for now.

if you mean displaying the contents of ~/Desktop, that patch was approved for committing today. it'll be optional and i'm very tempted to turn it off by default because it is, quite honestly, one of the most stupid ideas. the only reason people keep asking for it is because they are used to it, not because it's actually any good.

if you mean files and applications in general, that's been there for some time.

> and application starter icons in the panel.

already been there for a while as well. we need to make it more obvious how to add things to the panel and how to configure icons to be associated with specific applications (rather than files or urls)

"one of the most stupid ideas. the only reason people keep asking for it is because they are used to it, not because it's actually any good."

Ahem... who says that this is stupid? Another of those usability studies? And isn't it legitimate to expect functionality of a desktop simply because you are used to the fact that a tool has a certain functionality?

As for me, I put all my important apps and documents as links onto th desktop. If I want to start one of them, I press the "show desktop" button and then the icon I want. Voila. Faster than any stupid Kickoff- or even the traditional menu.

And this is nowadays considered stupid and deprecated? I think this "we know better than the users what is good for them"-attitude should be left to Gnome...

let's take stock here: you mock usability studies, throw "you're like gnomers" crap, evidently don't get the the tie in between "people keep asking for it because they are used to it" and "legitimate to expect functionality of a desktop simply because you are used to the fact that a tool has certain functionality" (hint: that's what i bloody well wrote! hello?!)

but here's the real winner:

"I put all my important apps and documents as links onto th desktop. If I want to start one of them, I press the "show desktop" button and then the icon I want"

why is it the winner? because you have been able to do precisely what you describe here for, oh, i dunno, 6+ months now?

let's re-read exactly what i wrote: "displaying the contents of ~/Desktop"

note that i didn't say "showing icons that represent applications or files". no, i wrote: "displaying the contents of ~/Desktop". those aren't the same things. not even close. the latter is a stupid idea because assuming that all you care about exists in a single literal directory on disk is a bit on the naive side. it also makes it nearly impossible to easily swap around layouts, share settings, etc.

wouldn't you say?

so .. back it up, turn around and try again. i'm trying to offer you something that works better (collections of items from pretty much anywhere you wish) and instead you reply like this.

i really don't need the abuse just because you fail to read closely enough or comprehend (not sure which it was) what i wrote. if you don't agree with something, ask questions or provide comments from a place of sincerity (because maybe, just maybe, you don't understand it yet) but save the sly insults and ridiculous attempts at wit. not needed, not wanted and in the end you've only made yourself look foolish for arguing against something that's not even a problem.

> Faster than any stupid Kickoff

well, at least you managed to get a swipe in something else along the way, right?

Hey Aaron, please take it easy on the guy. I've also misunderstood what you've meant with ~/Desktop when I first read your post, so maybe you were not that clear in your first explanation. But now I think you've clarified a bit.

So in KDE 3.5 everything was in ~/Desktop, and there you've had files and links to other apps. If I understand correctly, in KDE 4 the Desktop has a buil-in list of links to files? I've never found confusing the idea of having a ~/Desktop, but since I don't quite understand the new solution I can't judge what is better.

But I trust that whatever you guys do will have a reason. I think it is silly for people to complain at this stage of development.

I think that given the short timeframe, you guys should just stop trying to make everyone happy. Focus on your goals and release a stable product, even if some things are not configurable to everyone's taste. Then gather all comments from users, and polish everything for 4.1

Your "collections of items from pretty much anywhere you wish" sounds a little like "a directory full of links" that could perhaps reside in ~/Desktop? I figured links were the Right Way of dealing with places where you needed to get a bunch of not-entirely-related things in one play, and having things as files in directories has to be the proper unix thing to do.

In fact, I'm a little cheesed that (on whatever I'm using now, not KDE4) I have device icons on my desktop that don't show up in ~/Desktop for some reason.

"the latter is a stupid idea because assuming that all you care about exists in a single literal directory on disk is a bit on the naive side."

Things I care about (and wish to display on the desktop) exist in a single directory *because I put them there or link them to there*. What's so wrong with having an actual directory that corresponds 1 to 1 with what is displayed on the desktop?

Maybe I would like to browse through all those important files and links with Dolphin/Konqueror/Konsole. How am I going to do that if the desktop is a bunch of files from multiple places in the filesystem ("collections of items from pretty much anywhere you wish")? What was wrong with using links to do just that: placing items from various places in the filesystem on the desktop? It worked, and didn't break the ability to browse the desktop with Dolphin/Konqueror/Konsole.

The desktop as a container for important apps and documents that need attention (or links thereto) is a paradigm that's been around a long time. If by default this container is not viewable in its entirety (at the same time) within the standard filebrowsing tools it's a step backwards, especially since the supposed benefits were already achievable with links.

Seriously, I take issue with "displaying the contents of ~/Desktop ... is a stupid idea". Removing the ability to browse the desktop so one can achieve through nebulous different means exactly what "ln *someFile* ~/Desktop" already did is incredible.

And if the desktop is still somehow browsable then how on earth is that any different from an end user perspective from having a ~/Desktop that matches with the desktop? Either you've got a desktop container visible when all windows are out of the way and browsable with Dolphin with an ioslave or something (in which case it's functionally no different from the old method at all so what's the point) or the desktop isn't browsable. The latter, while not the end of the world can't be called "good".

So I've mentioned something ~/Desktop was good for: accessibility with Dolphin and all the accompanying sorting possibilities incumbent in the detailed list view. What is one single thing the new method does that couldn't be done with links? Some pretty plasma gui for "adding random item to the desktop from someplace in the filesystem that isn't ~/Desktop"? Whatever the method is, is there some reason it can't be a frontend for linking said items to ~/Desktop?

There's plenty of understandable annoyance coming from you, but I don't see it accompanied by any convincing arguments that the current desktop isn't a step backwards. Obviously that can just as well mean that I don't understand the convincing arguments; I'm not as close to this as you. Elaborate on "sharing settings" perhaps? I'm not sure I'd prefer being able to share my personal layout of widgets to being able to find the newest item on the desktop with Konqueror.

1) The basic idea of having the desktop as an area for files (and files alone) most often leads to the desktop becoming a general dumping ground. I have seen this on the desktops of many, many users (including my own). When it becomes too cluttered with files it is simply a pain to manage. The very fact that you want to use a file manager to also look at the contents of the desktop tells me that you have a lot of files there, and it is likely that some of those files would be better placed and more easily organised elsewhere. The logical conclusion of all of this surely is that "the desktop as just a directory of files" scheme doesn't really work very well (for most people anyway).

2) It sounds like you are seeing Plasma as only about showing files and other similar items on the desktop - it's a lot more than that. We're talking quite powerful and in some cases even interactive applets here. Plasma allows for much more flexibility, and I would argue that it will enable you to have items on your desktop that are actually more useful to you in your regular desktop usage.

As I see it, the ability to have icons on your desktop through Plasma is simply a stopgap to allow those people who insist on working the old way to continue to do so.

If you would like to explore this further, perhaps you could mention the types of items you currently have on your desktop, how often you use them, etc.

I never use icons on desktop because for most part it makes me mimize all the multi windows i have open to run another app.. But I do extensivly use icons on panel. And only place ones there I use repetitively...kde 4.0 does not allow this from what I seen..If it does..I not figured out how to go about it. So I am left with click kicker...then click from a favorite list. I prefer one click on panel besides..its much easier to see and read which ones i want to launch on panel. I do like the favorites kicker..but I would never solely depend on it when I done experienced icons one click from a panel Also when list on favorites in kde 4 becomes to long you have to scroll as well. I have found no way to stretch the kicker menu. Nice ideal I dissagree with it being the sole way to access your apps. I would aggree with some other post...freedom feels bit restricted to one person point of view in KDE 4.0. Now on to the file manager. This is by far the most smartest beautiful file manager I have ever had the pleasure of using. My hat is off to the functionality of it. The clock. I not sure the reason why cannot set clock from military time to 12 hour. or if you can I am not finding it. But to me this seems to be a push to force others into a standard. Majority of america is on 12 hour. just removing it from a desktop to change way things is done will only hamper in the growth of KDE as a world desktop. It does not reside on ever computer..windows does for most part..so I would delay this logic at time being. This is My Opinion. right or wrong. Its still about Freedom of choice..not Whos smarter or Right way or Wrong way. graphics in KDE are top class. Best of luck with KDE 4.0 I still have my reserves but will use it until I know where it goes after release. KDE 3.58=amazing KDE 4.00 Not judging until release.

If you note the code names for some of the previous RCs and betas, they too had Cs instead of Ks. I haven't seen anything official on it, but I did see speculation by a user (much as I'm now speculating as a user) that they are intentionally doing this for the betas/rcs, but will return to "K" for the official 4.0 and beyond releases.

I am 100% sure, that KDE will from then on use "G" names, until the very last person in the universe is going to notice, that letters are only letters. And nothing beats the fun of confusing people. :)

Why does the konqueror in the screenshot have an embedded console? Seriously now, the middle information thing in konqueror looks like a second window on top of the konqueror window. The new oxygene theme has not a lot of contrast (which works ok for me) but why on earth do we need THAT amount of contrast in such prominent a place? Everytime I open up konqi I think it opened konsole inside.

I really don't want to criticise KDE4; mostly I'm just looking forward to it now. But I have to agree on this one. Theming in general still needs some work, imho. I guess it's all still planned though.

I think the main frustration from users is that this is named "RC", when under the feeling of many of us this is more an alpha or beta release. For this reason , lots of people are panicking and think "oh, my God, please don't let this come to release in a month". People usually expect a RC to be a full-working product, with just bug squashing. I know, this is not your fault, I'm just trying to share some of the feelings coming from RC-tester users. People get a sweet-sour taste when the kick-off menu is still morphing, looking for the right direction.

But no one will fail to notice that KDE 4 is a major improvement over 3. I just think that people should take this easier, thinking of KDE4 release as kind of like a beta and version 4.1 as the final release. I'm sure it will kick ass.

People have thrown kudos for the speed improvements vs RC1. Some people don't know how to canalyze their frustration, when their expectation to have a RC being full-featured revolutionizing product dissolves. And sometimes this becomes too loud. Just don't get unmotivated about this, the whole OSS community is still betting very strong on KDE4 because we know it will rock. Thanks for offering your time and hard work to this.

Hey you guys, the RC2 rocks! As for today i switched to KDE4 on a day per day basis. I have to do that with compiz though, because on my Geforce 5200 kwin is really slow. I sure hope this will change over time.

Single other thing that bugs me is the appereance of the digital clock... in a screencast Aaron once did there was this design with a horizontal line with an animated train station-like letter change. Now this was really kind of fresh and new, why is now this boring and clunky clock in the panel? Please, put the old model back in as default. Think about the first impression... you wanted to 'wow' the users, didn't you?

...aw, come on... don't let a bunch of small minded gnomes dictate the default use of a clunky clock!

The train station clock was awesome and cool, and the big clunky one isn't. It's just that easy. I understand that the compromise with the progress bars, the tabs and the menus is due to lack of time, but DELIBERATELY replacing a perfectly good animated and awesome clock with a clunky one is just not cool. Seriously, reconsider this.

I'm aware of the fact, that there are desktop users who appreciate boring things and can't stand innovative ideas. But there are many others, namely KDE users, who are a bit disappointed if their DE takes steps back just to please those who are small minded.

Don't forget, that KDE and Gnome mark different approaches. You guys decided to make a huge version step towards 4.0 for example, and against the small steps that the gnome side loves so much. So please, if you find something cool, and your users do, just let it friggin be that way.

A few reasons why I choose KDE over Gnome (not saying that Gnome is not good) are: it's richness, flexibility, that it's so highly configurable, that it gives it's users total freedom and control but still remain simple and easy enough for anyone to learn quickly.
I have tried Gnome time and time again but kept coming back to KDE because of the above mentioned and I would be very sad should KDE lose those features. I believe that the developers are listening but there are two many vioces speaking at the same time so I would advise them to follow their path of success, the path of innovation and freedom.

"By the way is it possible to have a proposed layout with two panels like gnome ?"

Are you reffering to the OSX-like panel at the top in KDE 3.5x? I think that I read somewhere that it will be available later but not sure if it will be in 4.0. I guess there is someone here who can answer this question better than me.

My daddy is better then your daddy. This corner of the sandbox is taken and if you don't like it, I am going to tell mommy.

Again, welcome to the Dot kindergarden, part 2.

You know, this 'Mike' is actually a little kid who is going to the themepark going to get a wrist watch - not YOU, are you so _dense_??? I didn't even know a name in this **amazing** clock thread.

Why do I think the Dot is turning into a kindergarden sandbox? Well, your short term memory is better then my short turn memory etc. etc. You even insist on projecting a Marc into something, I had no idea who Marc was (well, now I see, you used that name) You imply I confuse names. Little Mike has got nothing to do with any Marc here, unless you imply to insist yourself.

"Your last cited sentence is a product of your imagination."

This WHOLE freaking clock talk is a product of our imagination - the way we play in this AMAZING clock sandbox, is something else.

So, there you have it, my clock is better then your clock. (sticks out tongue)

Anyway, I like both clocks, I really do. What I like even better, is our ability to choose between them.